Search

I don’t know about anybody else, but I think by now Julia Gillard has hands down won the verbal battle currently consuming the emotional and mental energies of our elected members. Her confident stamina in the face of the Opposition’s unrelenting (if largely ineffectual) attempts at reputational savagery is astounding. I get tired just thinking about it. I can think of many occasions in my life when I would have given anything for even a smidgen of Ms Gillard’s élan.

What a role model she’s turned out to be! If you overlook the knifing, asylum seeker policy, single parents on Newstart, Palestine, but what the hell, nobody’s perfect and credit must be given where it’s due, must it not and the PM can do scathing repartee better than any of them.

The Opposition, led in this fight by an increasingly bedraggled and war-weary Julie Bishop loyally firing her beloved boss’s shots, have well and truly lost the battle. Having produced little more than exorbitant amounts of piss and wind, they will limp defeated from the chamber tomorrow to lick their Gillard-inflicted wounds over the break and good riddance to them, I say.

I still have no clear idea what the PM is supposed to have done, but I don’t care really. If nobody has managed to come up with anything of substance for twenty years, and by the gods plenty have tried, then I for one am willing to call bollocks and move on.

I do hope they all lift their game next year, because the political discourse has gone to the feckin dogs.

292 Responses to “And the winner is: Ms Gillard”

Well we all live in hope. Mine would be that she’d show even a scintilla of the passion she reserves for defending her own character for promoting a few of the core values that we’d expect from a Labor government.

I imagine this is a bit like shopping for cheap jousting sticks in the trading post!

We must all remember than if a PM comes from a major party, they are a follower,not a leader.
They just sniff the arse of the dog in front.(as it were)
Unless the dog is American,in which case it involves oral stimulation. ;-)

Why should that surprise you? Gillard is a lawyer, and a female lawyer who became a partner in a large firm in the early 90’s. The glass ceiling was well in place, and I imagine she trod on many toes, especially as her student politics suggested she was far left.

She clearly approaches most issues in lawyerly fashion : detachment, disinterest, careful negotiation, analysis and synthesis of the issues.

This is mistaken for not caring, for racism, for lack of interest in the issue in question. It is lawyerly reserve. She is tough and resilient with a strong hide. And a fine sense of humour, which she tries to restrain; the example of Bill Hayden’s misfortunes in the use of irony is there for all to see.

But prick her and she will eventually respond, as and when it suits her : with wrath against Abbott and all he stands for, with a deep contempt and dislike for Bishop.

Those who seek to understand her generally fail; she is complex and guarded. And extremely competent.

In short she may well be, and certainly will become, one of our best Prime Ministers.

Rubbish, Roma MItchell was already a judge, she resided over my own divorce in 1978 and women in Australia had the vote first.

No glass ceiling in law in the 1990’s that is just plain crap.

But as a lawyer who dealt only with corporate affairs she has no idea of real law and hasn’t bothered to ever be educated to the fact that you don’t sell fucking human beings to appease the racists in the mortgage belt.

And she will never be one of our best PM”s, she is loathsome and only interested in herself.

She will sell out anyone to cover her own arse and your worship of this ghastly coward is appalling.

I find the account surprising and the context perhaps a little starkly painted. To say that our PM would not find this kind of incident as regrettable if not more so than the next person seems incredible to me. And clearly as the person who now holds it within her power to prevent similar recurrences the question is a fair one.

As I understand both the current Labor policy and that of their predecessors there is a duty of care to prevent such deaths from occurring. So it would on the facts as stated appear to have been a terrible mistake in the application of policies rather than a direct result of the way that these policies are drafted.

It suffices to say Gillard’s response may have added to the dissatisfaction that I think we should primarily reserve for those public servants who had quite apparently failed in their duty of care.

Hypo, I don’t know where else you post, perhaps less moderately, but in some quarters Doug’s a gentleman alongside some of the arseholes and character assassins you’re liable to come up against. So I think civility helps us tolerate the odd contrary view, and maybe even discuss it without long and tedious excursions into ad hominem and claims and counter claims of the pot calling the kettle a non sequitur or a strawman.

“If you overlook the knifing, asylum seeker policy, single parents on Newstart, Palestine, but what the hell, nobody’s perfect and credit must be given where it’s due, must it not and the PM can do scathing repartee better than any of them.”

Going to disagree, JW.
I want substance,Labor values and compassion.This nation needs leaders not sideshows.How do Gillards allainces and history justify the removal of Rudd?
That does not mean I consider the opposition or its front bench anything worthy of praising.Not a policy in sight.

I’m well over one side is not as bad as the other.Well over it.They both (currently) suck.

The reason they care more for cows that humans is that (A) They have invested a lot in bullshit, and can never get enough of it,
and,

(B) Farmers carry lots of guns.(You never know when a stampede of salt-water crocodiles will storm through the Hinterland looking for a primary school to maraud) Oh, and they carry a lot of votes as well-not that a single farmer ever voted labor.

Greg Combet was a stand out today in the HoR.
He even got away with calling Abbott a gutless ‘something or other’ as he walked away to his seat.Normally that would have drawn a rebuke and result in a withdrawal.

Gillard will soon have her smirk snuffed,I’d say.And I hope(we need them to) Labor has a Plan B.

Ist Bipartisan we the opposition and minors supplied with false information?I think that kind of nullifies that bipartisanship.

I agree that the RC ‘should’ do their job.
But as I have said before,it does not appear to be in their DNA.
Which indicates the levels of paedophilia, abuse and cover up are probably more far reaching than we can begin to imagine.
The kicking and screaming is till going on,save a few loan and not so powerful individuals.So the ones calling for immediate and unconditional co-operation are so small in number and so impotent of force, what of real and permanent change?
Unless it’s proved otherwise the RC church (going on previous form) will use every tactic it can until the only one they have left is to waste precious time.
I base this opinion on the total lack of public announcements and vehement responses Vatican itself.
If they are not in shock and awe was does that tell you?
That this behaviour leading to a RCom, is all a mirage or an epidemic?

The kicking and screaming is still going on,save a few lone and not so powerful individuals.So the ones calling for immediate and unconditional co-operation are so small in number, and so impotent of force, what chance of any real and permanent change?
Unless it’s proved otherwise the RC church (going on previous form) will use every tactic it can, until the only one they have left is to waste precious time.
I base this opinion on the total lack of public announcements and vehement responses from the Vatican itself .
If they are not in shock and awe was does that tell you?
That this behaviour leading to a RCom, is all a mirage or an epidemic?

I guess if we’re to believe that the opposition parties were lied to then it may be plausible that the government were lied to also. Some accounts of the events of the time seem to support that. But I’d still be more inclined to think both parties weren’t just saving face if a change of government had ushered in a change of our policy towards the war in Afghanistan.

As for the second point in longhand my sentence should be read “The Royal Commission should do its job”. I’m not trying to make the point that the Roman Catholic church was anything other than as you characterised, which view is I think supported by some of their own clergy.

No HG,the RCom ‘if’ structured correctly could have manifold effects and deliver in spades.My concern is more for the possible lack of conviction, temporarily/conveniently frayed memories, and minimal (non?) co-operation of the perpetrators.
How it delivers is obviously yet to be seen.
I am also very wary of how many teeth an opportunistic (gun shy) govt may actually give the RCom in the first place.(Terms and refs)

Whether the RCom delivers is one thing,whether the main players on the culpability and electoral impact side of things ‘really’ want it to is another.
This was not a concept born within govt,remember.There was definite reluctance until the people spoke out.

The scope should have been initially narrow and dealt with the RC church in the first instance IMO.With an opportunity for all victims of all institutionalised abuse to register from day one,with appropriate counselling and support provided independently.I just think the RC element ‘may’ yet be bigger than Ben Hur.

At the moment I put the potential of this RCom in the same basket as Peace in the Middle East.

I specifically recall that Blair made the point that Afghanistan was the source of 90% of the world’s heroin trade, without mentioning that the mob they were supporting were the perpetrators. Not the Taliban for all their faults. Not to mention the exception drug producers in South East Asia might have taken to news of such a dramatic fall in their market share…

So yes politicians made a bunch of unreliable statements around about that time….

Yes, I’d love to see Johnnie be held accountable for something, anything – somehow the war(s) would have to be right up there…

Unfortunately, I’m sure any findings will mean diddly if the US attacks Iran or anywhere else we think we should follow the procession of LBJ’s into. A few ministers will wag their fingers, hundreds of thousands will take to the streets, and off to conquer…er, save, foreign lands we go…

Despite all the nonsense negativity and catcalls from the sidelines the Gillard government is getting on with the business of governing.

Take cheap pot-shots if you will, drip with satire and sarcasm – even a sometime Green with a Messiah complex gets it eventually (though probably not Marliyn) – the dogs may bark but the caravan moves on.

Education reforms, the NBN rollout, the economy rolls along, the National Disability Scheme, the reforms to the Murray-Darling, the initiatives in diplomacy in the region – none of them nearly as sexy as a bit of crap shovelling, are they?

Not as heart-rending as a few would-be refugees is it? No, not even the Royal Commission into the RC Church.

Now how does it go : what have the Romans ever done for us?

“Xerxes:
What exactly are the demands?
Reg:
We’re giving Pilate two days to dismantle the entire apparatus of the Roman Imperialist State and if he doesn’t agree immediately we execute her.
Matthias:
Cut her head off?
Francis:
Cut all her bits off, send ‘em back every hour on the hour… show him we’re not to be trifled with.
Reg:
Also, we’re demanding a ten foot mahogany statue of the Emperor Julius Caesar with his cock hanging out.
Stan:
What? They’ll never agree to that, Reg.
Reg:
That’s just a bargaining counter. And of course, we point out that they bear full responsibility when we chop her up, and… that we shall not submit to blackmail.
Omnes:
(Applause) No blackmail!
Reg:
They’ve bled us white, the bastards. They’ve taken everything we had, not just from us, from our fathers and from our fathers’ fathers.
Stan:
And from our fathers’ fathers’ fathers.
Reg:
Yes.
Stan:
And from our fathers’ fathers’ fathers’ fathers.
Reg:
All right, Stan. Don’t labour the point. And what have they ever given us in return?
Xerxes:
The aqueduct.
Reg:
Oh yeah, yeah they gave us that. Yeah. That’s true.
Masked Activist:
And the sanitation!
Stan:
Oh yes… sanitation, Reg, you remember what the city used to be like.
Reg:
All right, I’ll grant you that the aqueduct and the sanitation are two things that the Romans have done…
Matthias:
And the roads…
Reg:
(sharply) Well yes obviously the roads… the roads go without saying. But apart from the aqueduct, the sanitation and the roads…
Another Masked Activist:
Irrigation…
Other Masked Voices:
Medicine… Education… Health…
Reg:
Yes… all right, fair enough…
Activist Near Front:
And the wine…
Omnes:
Oh yes! True!
Francis:
Yeah. That’s something we’d really miss if the Romans left, Reg.
Masked Activist at Back:
Public baths!
Stan:
And it’s safe to walk in the streets at night now.
Francis:
Yes, they certainly know how to keep order… (general nodding)… let’s face it, they’re the only ones who could in a place like this.

(more general murmurs of agreement)
Reg:
All right… all right… but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order… what have the Romans done for us?
Xerxes:
Brought peace!
Reg:
(very angry, he’s not having a good meeting at all) What!? Oh… (scornfully) Peace, yes… shut up! ”

As long as you don’t mention Gay Marriage, Asylum Seekers, Insulation Bats, Palestine, The original Mining Super Profits Tax, Julian Assange or Wikileaks, Copenhagen or anything to do with Slipper or Thompson…..What have the Romans ever done for us seems like a 50/50 proposition.

Now you can bat all those back if you like. Hell, I’ll even bat ‘em back for you. You know we’ve both done it often enough, but seriously it’s disappointing when anyone with such a talent for oratory in her own defence hasn’t used it to further some of the policies that really needed defending.

But Gillard probably does have nearly a year to run before an election, so here’s hoping some of that starch she’s recently found actually makes its way to her spine.

I wouldn’t include Gillard’s “education reforms” under the heading of progress for actual education. Standardized testing is something she borrowed from the US – and which has since been panned by some its initial proponents.

If we’re looking to turn our kids into meek robotic vessels to be filled with info, then this is obviously the way to go. Teaching to test wastes months of valuable time, stresses students and their teachers and moves us further away from instilling in our kids the value of self-directed and independent skills in learning.

I agree.
We will become, in essence, all the bad things white South Africa was criticised for .More interested in colour, class elevation, and cricket scores, than compassion or benevolence.
Sound familiar?

I think that racism runs deep in this country and cannot be so easily exorcised by mere Governments or legislation. Its a root cause well documented in Australia historically (White Australia policy anyone?) We are still a very long way from ever removing it and it might be one of those types of social problems like alcoholism, all we can ever do is moderate but never rid ourselves of it. Clearly government pandering to opinion pollsters is influencing policy in the direction of where the votes lie, but to so weakly give in to this is tanatamount to allowing Genghis Khan to overrun your village just because everyone else seems to be conceeding. I dont have an answer for anyone on how to solve this but I suspect it lies outside the halls of approval grasping poiliticians.

It’s great ‘politically fellating’ our way onto the UN committee so we can ignore our human rights and refugee conventions and abstain from all the important votes which affect the ‘United Nations” and world, in general.
(Oh wait, sometimes if the vote is important and we follow the Yankee How To Vote card….)

Ah yes, segue to Frank Zappa’s suggested conversation topic of “brown lipstick in the corporate environment” on Letterman in 1983, (which clip I happened to see on YouTube). It’s now nearly 30 years later, and I don’t think the reference has lost it’s meaning?

.
There is no election due until August – October next year. By that time the new Opposition Leader may well have shot himself (no ‘herself’ likely!) in the foot often enough to see Labor canter home, Obama-like, by a country mile : as I consistently predicted the US election throughout the last six months.

Or they can stick with Abbott. They might as well, no-one else can secure enough votes in the Liberal Party room.

I won’t say Gillard Labor by a country mile, at least not yet. But I do predict that Labor can and will win with her as PM.
.

But how about we all move to Manly and ensure that Abbott loses his seat regardless of what else happens? That’s all I’m concerned about. Imagine what the simple absence of one man could do to the tone of the entire political spectrum!

Abbot comes across as one of the most tightly wound and insecure humans I have ever seen.
Given his deep religious roots it’s not surprising.
(you may even see a pattern there, of angry white men, who have similar histories)

Don’t panic Sam,pretty soon something in or around him is about to snap.
The pressure on Pell and his church, via the RCom,should hurry the snapping along.
Whether the snapping confirms or disproves God, is the interesting bit.
None of what happens to Abbott justifies Gillard and her abandonment of Labor values.She is also unworthy to be our PM, simply based on that and her sycophancy to the USA.Our leaders need to represent US, not foreign powers.
We cannot have a petty thief as a PM, and Gillard clearly stole Howard’s policy handbook.

Rudd.No question.He is an enemy of the NSW right , which makes Kevin a clear choice.
Gillard is a talking head for a mob who continually risk(and will continue to risk) a clear uninterrupted term of Labor governance, simply because of the sleazy baggage they carry.

But I could live with what ‘formed perception’ I have of Turnbull,if that happened.

Having said that,I would hope that Mal would de-reward the idiots who took Abbott over him.
That would at least deliver a term of circuit breaking civility, where we can all ‘re-respect’ our elected reps.We need that so much.

My impression of Rudd is that he’s nothing but a super-computer… perfectly OK if you’re going to run a closed system (like Qld for example ;-) ), just not super enough to cope with the complexity of being PM. There’s nary a trace of humanity in him, except for those rare occasions when he overloads and crashes.

I’m behind Julia. Yes she’s contravened Labor values, and though it’s eminently arguable that she has gone too far with things like the Tributo a Gitmo that they’ve set up on Nauru, I think ultimately she knows that they just have to do these things in order to remain in power (and as I’ve said before, I’m sure puts herself through all sorts of emotional torture in her weaker moments as a result… but self-harming scars on the forearms are so sexy, don’t you think?), and thus to have any chance of advancing their cause in other crucial areas.

That said, of all the current mob I’ve got my eye on Tony Burke as a future leader. Not much panache perhaps, but if integrity and pragmatism can exist simultaneously in a single individual then he’s it.

I watched the apology to the Stolen Generation, so I disagree with him being devoid of humanity,especially when compared to Dullard.Had he still been in perhaps the momentum for a constitutional recognition would have seen subsequent action.You need to remember what actually happened,not what the media told us happened.He was knifed by the NSW right who used low polls as an excuse.
He would have creamed Abbott.

I’ve long thought that if there was something to the psychology of Welfare then to some extent it really is disconnected with political responses to unemployment in some rather fundamental ways.

As it has become politically expedient over time to break down unemployment categories into short and long term and place people on different benefits or under different schemes to shade the numbers what really doesn’t get addressed are the attitudes we’ve formed to welfare.

Whereas in a short term situation it makes some sense to have incentives for people to get back into the workforce, over a longer period of time and for those who genuinely fall into different categories this becomes punitive and encourages a great deal of negativity on any number of levels.

I suspect that what needs to be introduced to any conversation that we have about welfare payments therefore isn’t a blanket rate rise, but a rationalisation of where the money goes that is both better for those who need it most and seen to be as such.

I also wonder if the NDIS isn’t also going to affect how this whole area is treated.

As things like energy prices will start to rise I also see lifting the size of concessions people receive on their rates and utility bills as a good way to deal with it.

I advocate a rise in Newstart to the level of the Disability pension, ie from the relative lowest in the OECD to a more acceptable level.

A worker who loses his or her job aged 50 or so is in a poor state unless they own their own home. The money is no longer coming in but all the bills still need to be paid; there is only so long that a juggling act can last. Workers at that age need many months to find a new job, and Newstart should be geared to keeping them more or less at the same level in the meantime, whilst they search.

Even economists like Judith Sloan advocate a large rise in Newstart.

We must hope that if and when a budget surplus is safely put away, or we can all agree that it is no longer desirable, the adjustment will be made. Patience is a virtue; I just hope that the impoverished Newstart clients can last out the wait.

I’m wondering if the disability pension is going to disappear when NDIS comes in.

Apart from that it just concerns me that while “clients” (a term I’m not overly sure about) of the system do understand it I doubt that voters do. In fact I’m pretty sure that they don’t and that this is what leads to some of the problems. Even scathing comparisons to OECD levels of welfare fail to gain traction unless people are appraised of them in real terms with reference to measures they can easily appreciate.

I generally try to use short words, rather than long ones, and to avoid jargon if I can. I try to follow modern English usage and to avoid slang, and unnecessary complexity. Some may mistake this for simplicity or naivete.

I often try to respond to match the apparent sophistication of the interrogator; sometimes I get this wrong. Sometimes my ego gets the better of me. C’est la vie.

I like that last post from HG. The underlying elements that create and unblock gridlock are all inherent within the comment that includes, “psychology of Welfare”.
It’s where questions of philosophy and of what the economy is, people are and their purpose is and society is have been identified by HG.
The best you can do or say is that Gillard and Abbott may be examples of what a late capitalist economy produces as its version of “leadership”,as it slips further away from innovation and deeper into class-driven defensiveness. Conflict over issues symbolic evidences the loss of vision and adventure that defined an earlier age.
The politicians bob about like corks in an ocean, their sense of their own significance remains extant within them years after everyone else got tired of waiting and walked off.
What you see ultimately is a system that produces amateurs to run government and the reward must consequently derive from the antics of the politicians rather than fascination with what they (often accidentally ) actually achieve.
So, you don’t have to love a politician.
Chances are this politician is as mediocre as you or I.
What you look for is one likely to do less damage than the others and that is why people like myself and say, Marilyn, have different ideas on how useful Abbott or Gillard can be,,depending on how they see things panning out in the future.

Well Paul,
You just validated exactly why people should finally bite the bullet and vote for anyone but a member of the two major parties.Basically we have a choice of opportunistic fuckwits who sometimes trip over a real result on their way to a Golden Handshake, is what you are saying. All the while being loyal to the party well above being loyal to the plebs who actually got them their job.I’d call that serious hand biting.
But of course we all know that this Nation is rife with apathy, and there is Buckleys of anyone (in large enough numbers) actually thinking outside the box,let alone acting outside it.
That my friend is exactly why I won’t sell out my principles to legitimise “a puppet who jiggles for scum.”
(Especially for the pathetic reasoning of “I must, because she is not he.”)
You should also remember(unless naivety is your cuddly new friend) that if after all the toxic policies Gillard et al have introduced,she should win the election,that she won’t be reverting to a previous ‘warm hearted version of Labor’.These cold evolutionary changes are here to stay.And the direction right is set to continue.An even greater reason not to legitimise what you don’t believe in.

I didn’t think any one could out do me for sourness, but you have just taken the prize, Hypo.
Your comments a realistic enough,
It’s just the usual depressing gap between the desirable and what’s possible and what’s likely. It is morale sapping,
You must realise that the accumulated wasting of Mother Earth’s bounty on rubbish when there is so much misery that could be alleviated defeats even a moron.
But yes, it is true
Here in Adelaide for example, the likes of Gillard and US SoS Clinton have announced that further ploughshares be beaten into swords with the developing of facilities intended to service the US naval fleet.
“What”, you ask?
And its true.
We wouldn’t have them on our minds, except for Mitsubishi going bust and Holdens proppy and the economy here in the doldrums at the exact time that our generous fellow Aussies in some other states want an end to fiscal equalisation, the means for redressing income generation between resource rich and resource poor states within our Commonwealth.
So “Things Are Crook In Tallarook”, when you have to put up US uniformed guys in the spare rooom because the economy is phutt, But the fear of empty pockets and cupboards will drive even proud folk,let alone humble South Australians to dire straights, including (shudders) sacrificial loss of pride and the acceptance of the proposition proposed by the strong.

So the slide into permanent “Up You Jack”, is set to continue and gather momentum,then.
Meanwhile in modern politics Aussie style, the mode is now monorail.Same loco-motive up front,just different adverts on the carriages full of sheep being shuttled to the abattoirs.

Hopefully not. Although a nation that can afford to live in the fantasy land Oz lives in, ya gotta wonder!
Peter Sellers starred in a beaut black comedy over fifty years ago now, on your subject.
The odd thing is people’s incapacity for either great good or evil for any length of time. Part of this relates to Socrates’ proposition that folk find it harder to do wrong than right.
We know what a pain in the arse it is to do right sometimes, costly and time consuming, etc.
Yet Socrates claims it is harder to do wrong than right.
Disregarding things like consciences, can we say we are lucky to be as lazy as we are?
What hope, the Virtuous?

Hmmm well I’m not sure that I haven’t been deconstructed and put back together with a couple of pieces missing, when all I was really trying to say is that we all seem to want to be critical of welfare yet the last thing we’re disposed towards is actually understanding it. How much is too much, or how little too austere, clearly cannot depend on any objective standard if nobody knows anything about it really, apart from where their interests and sympathies lie.

Well HG it’s pretty obvious that the broader Australian society doesn’t really give a toss,because we buried the shoe swap tradition around about the era of the Howardasauras Rex.
What those people need (who draw benefits) is sustenance AND dignity.
The bulk of the populous dwells far too much on ‘what others have’ even though they wouldn’t swap places for quids.
I think the idea of linking real cost of living to the individuals circumstances has merit,but delivering it is fraught with difficulty, and there are still those who abuse the system.
That said,no wonder depression and suicide is on the rise, and manifesting in younger and younger kids.

See that’s the difference between a left wing cynic and a right wing one. Us lefties sulk that out egalitarian ideas seem to have been forgotten. Your true right-libertarian thinks suicide is a valid choice that takes pressure off the need for big government!

I was told by a friend the other night that I am extremist because I do not want a racist bigot as a leader of this country, both major party leaders today are racist bigots, but I bet many in both parties are not.

So why are we stuck with two far right bigots?

To appease the US and the racists in the mortgage belt who think they are owed everything.

“So why are we stuck with two far right bigots?”
The main reasons are:
They accurately reflect the mainstream view.
They ( and the MSM spin) draw the attention of the punters away,while the multinationals rape/pillage/burn/log/steal everything they can until they have had their fill or it runs out,whichever comes first.Given they cannot be filled……

Marilyn, how often have people explained that to you.
Because it is a corrupt world full of corrupt people at this stage in its development and people who have actual power and wealth do not the masses of people interfering in the processes that maintain the wealth and power status quo.
It’s not our ABC, its their’s, to paraphrase.

I don’t, I do listen, I just don’t agree with esoteric crap and never have.

A racist is a racist is a racist and Gillard is a racist.

If you don’t like that prove me wrong.

The AWU thing is a diversion from the racism that allows a man to stay near death in a stinking old tent on Nauru after being kidnapped, rendered and tormented by us – he was only brought to Australia today and was then told if he lives he will go back to Nauru.

It takes a real true blue racist to be so cruel to a man just because he asked for help after dissenting against the Iranian government and wanting his rights upheld here.

Perhaps if Gillard was not aware of the cruelty of what she is doing that would allow her some wriggle room but she is well aware and does not care.

Her ignorant belief that we should vote against the Palestinians is led by the racist zionist lobby in Melbourne, it has to be seen for what it is – racism.

Her decree that gays shall not marry must only be seen as bigotry to pander to the likes of Joe De Bruyn and never mind the rights of the people involved.

Her abuse of single parents while pretending she is a victim of sexism is abhorrent and bullying and should be called bullying.

Gillard and Abbott are twins separated at birth but with the same ingrained racist streak, must be the pommy thing.

And they have the same contempt for the law, the rule of law and separation of powers and neither are fit to tie the bootlaces of most of us.

So suck it up Doug.

Or prove me wrong.

Forgot to mention the abuse of David Hicks, Julian Burnside and others because she is too lazy and ignorant to care.

“Gillard and Abbott are twins separated at birth”
Word.
Or Yin and Yang.

Some people are taking longer than others to wake up.Some never will.Some cannot be arsed even when wide awake.If the NSW right get away with the installation of Gillard ‘plus’ an election win the punters will wonder what hit them.Little Johnny will start to look like Mother Theresa.

The PM carries out the laws. If you don’t like the laws, try to change them.

If you don’t like being given a parking ticket either don’t park there or change the law so it isn’t against the law.

Don’t blame the parking cop or the ranger.

As for the vote for enhanced Palestinian status, I doubt very much that any racist impulses were at work; probably more like a desire to support our great ally, a somewhat misplaced desire in my view. In any event, it did not happen.

I don’t that the job description reads “somebody to run the country and make laws on a part time basis in the event that greens or independents might quite like to enter into power sharing arrangements on weekends and public holidays.”

If I my be taken quite seriously for asking, what makes you think Gillard is a racist, as opposed to somebody who it might be assumed from your account of her is lacking in compassion or simply disagrees for other reasons we cannot be completely sure of?

I did get the feeling that Howard had played the race card once too often, and hardly think I was on my own in holding that sentiment.

I think Abbott is damned by feint praise, as well as guilt by association with his former mentor. Heck! He even wanted to change the racial vilification act.

But of Gillard I can only say that if pandering to xenophobia be guilt by association with racists then I’m thoroughly prepared to condemn her as an apologist for the worst kind of bigotry.

I just see no particular evidence of personal racism on her part. And I think it probably does make a difference to the language we’re entitled to use.

Walk?Tick.Very Duck like.
Talk? Tick. Very,very Duck like
Bottom feeder? Tick (lawyer)
Skimmer? ?Likely.
Does mud or shit slide off her??Apparently (well at least for now)
Does she fly to get around?Tick
Seen migrating North?Tick
Thankfully I don’t know if she smells like a duck.
But do ducks carry knives?
Come to think of it I do recall hearing that on the night Rudd was axed someone was heard screaming, “DUCK KEVIN!!!!! , DUCK!!!!!”

Sorry HG.
I thought I would just point out that by now we should all know that Gobbard’s default position is 8 furlongs to the right of Howard.So calling her a racist may well be complimentary.There’s plenty of wood in Canberra, so in regard to Bollard, I think you will find that lots of mystery ‘objects’ will start to pop out it soon enough, and end in a mind numbing crescendo.Whenever a leak or scandal comes from the right the trickles soon become Niagara falls in volume.

My mind is made up, but,just out of curiosity can you think why Brandis would risk a defamation suit,if he was just jumping at shadows?Or why if he is FOS, why Julia Mallard has not called in the lawyers yet,if she is all squeaky clean?
I mean surely there is something in all this which prevents her from going onto a real attack?

Okay Doug, I’m not taking that option off the table and never even inferred that. To the same extent that I’d ask of Marilyn whether she’s ever been overly racist then I’d ask of you whether there’s evidence that she’s ever been particularly supportive of things like multiculturalism or defended immigration from non Anglo countries.

So far as I can see apart from her appalling policies to target asylum seekers she’s a complete blank slate on racial issues. And frankly what I’ve been saying here takes the view that if the passion she has shown in her own defence could only be channelled into ending racism in this country she might actually be WORTH saving.

Sorry Hudgod, you seem again too soft on Tony Abbott and the whole dry edifice of the coalition side of politics.
But you can rationally see Dougs’ point, which part of me identifies with, a gut level thing discussed by JW in several other threads in the past here on “othering” and why it is powerful amongst Hansonists here and Romneyites in the USA, and such a good means for the establishment to achieve their perhaps dubious “control” impulses and capitalist objectives without understanding the intolerance that animates culture at this time in history that could be being energised with fatal result for many across the globe. The lords of the universes’ sense of greedy and social apathy in general have not prevented them from wreaking the damage warned of during the thirty years previous to this century in ecology, misuse of technology and economics.
Hi Marilyn, as you Hypo and Jennifer Wilson ought to know, I do not enjoy being part of the “Solutions” of the last decade: Howard’s government was vile it is hard to praise Labor’s conduct and I don’t know why the ALP has to have been so timid in moving to better treatment of deserving asylum seekers.
But I think it relates as much to real politik, including from the pragmatist ALP government itself of the manipulable nature of embedded, even subconscious racism not only in Australia, the West but transculturally, the global apparatus controlling this fast becoming largely apparatchiks of international capita against the rational often regional interests of many “others”.
But I feel DQ’s and Hudgod’s comments a little
more credible than some here give them credit for, for some sense of worldly politics.

Thank you Paul. Those who always seek to take the high moral ground just don’t understand how the world works. Those of my view are in a minority here, not surprisingly, but I do try to educate some of those who will listen.

I want to be able to bury Howard and Abbott in the ignominy they deserve on these racial issues by comparison with Labor, but they’re just not giving us the opportunity to do so.

Rudd, yes even Rudd, who I otherwise thought was pretty hopeless, was a great brilliant shining light on these issues by comparison. He apologised to the First Australians, in a move that had by that time become a political necessity, but at least he did it and made it feel genuine for a while. He made asylum seeker policies less harsh too. Probably as much as the political environment of the time could allow. But ultimately we know he floundered in the job, and blotted his copy book a couple of times in his dealings with the Chinese. he didn’t leave me convinced in any way that he could lead on racial issues of much else.

Gillard on the other hand as I’ve said, being a capable orator in her own defence appears to lack conviction on many issues. She was strong enough on education reform though unconvincing to my way of thinking in the direction she’s taken with NAPLAN. And on racial issues I have to ask because I just don’t fucking know. And I ought to know. She should be leading with her ability, but the only thing she seems to do is crucify refugees on the cross of her own political ambition. Why? I ask myself, because given a choice between her and Mr Rabbit then it isn’t a matter of a simple preference, it’s actually imperative in my view that we DON’T get Abbott.

Ejja cyashun (Education) in fact is Gizzards fall back position.She thinks she invented it.
It has now become a mish mash of piece meal bureaucratic wish lists since the plasticine Garrett took over.
The talk of educating better has dominated the conversation,meantime nothing has changed.In fact it’s heading backwards.Our own people should have greater and cheaper access to uni, and there should be no labour shortages in a mining (any) boom which has a labour shortage.More failure.Not even trying.

Suck it up Mr Jovica, our govt is too busy persecuting the weak to be running around after you….

and here’s the ironic twist..

*Professor Rothwell said it was not yet clear whether consular officials were doing enough on Mr Jovica’s behalf.

“His matter is being dealt with under Philippine law at the moment and that’s entirely legitimate for Filipino legal purposes,” he said.

“But there does become a point in some of these matters, when fundamental human rights are being infringed, that it’s more than appropriate for the Australian Government to intervene.”

REPEAT

“But there does become a point in some of these matters, when fundamental human rights are being infringed, that it’s more than appropriate for the Australian Government to intervene”

AGAIN

But there does become a point in some of these matters, when fundamental human rights are being infringed, that it’s more than appropriate for the Australian Government to intervene.

*Professor Donald Rothwell, an expert in international law at the Australian National University.

Fundamental human rights are to Gillard et al,what wide mouthed frogs are to alligators.on one hand we have bullshit about wanting the First Australians recognised in the constitution, on the other their rights are trampled by way of the intervention.On one hand wanting a seat at the UN security council, on the other too piss weak to vote or uphold the UN Conventions or to include our actual land mass in the guidelines.
It won’t be long and a legitimate refugee, held offshore, will set a precedent in law and the floodgates of humanity will be well and truly open.Watch how the parasites in power take the credit.Wide mouthed frogs everywhere.

I’ve heard it all now.
The sun shines out of the arse of someone who destroyed Labor, and now ethical standards thereof, are being set,nay demanded from DQ.
Ha fkn ha.
There are two sets of rules according to you DQ,One where you get to verbally smash the coalition, Abbott etc (and most times they deserve it based on actions and reactions they take) and yet faux Labor, the newly created Frankenstein of the NSW right,using a dead hearted woman for a Labor shop front, is out of bounds.
Some would say you have a Macabre sense of humour.
I just say blatant hypocrite.
Gillard should and will go.
No amount of posturing from you will change that.
This blog is an eyelash hair in the pacific ocean of voters intentions.Even if the MSM shut its gob about Gillards hypocrisy from today till beyond the election,she is toast.Taking the status quo, the next parliament will very likely not have a clear result,but if Gillard is leader it won’t be another Labor minority government.The best that we can hope for is a short lived coalition govt ( and a watershed moment for a reborn Labor) or a woken up electorate who actually vote with their brains for a change.
Both majors are a pox.An equally rancid, equally fetid, light weight blend of opportunistic dross.If it was raining courage they would all have their umbrellas up.

What does Macabre have to do with anything? She is thoroughly pissed off with you lot, and in any event probably in London by now, after hijacking my computer whenever she feels like insulting the nicest of the nice, Helvi. I’ve even tried passwords, but she is technically savvy. She does not like Reader1 or any of the other female bloggers (jealous?) ; she won’t even bother talking to Marilyn. I wonder why I bother. But Macabre is very talented . . . :)

As for your general malaise, I sympathise.

But you are very wrong. That I know that Realpolitik governs the real world does not mean that I have to like it. And I believe I have a very strong set of principles, based on the ideas which can be described in shorthand as :

When DQ decided to use an alter ego to abuse those he got frustrated with,he failed to think it through.
DQ obviously is happy in choosing to keep humiliating himself, which to me is very sad.

United States of Macabre or United States of DQ.
His choice.
But it still makes him a sock puppet.I did not think that would be necessary here of all places.But obviously the need to bag Helvi,bag Marilyn and bag me was too great, and he did not want to soil the DQ handle.

And to HG,
I presume your comment yesterday regarding ad homs applies to the coward using two identities to abuse posters here too,does it not?
Or do double standards apply equally to Gillard and to DQ/Macabre because he is her apologist?

I’ve only ever caught out one sock puppet, because usually I’m not that sharp on such things….but it came about that I looked a little more closely at the comments because this person chose the sock puppet to abuse me by helicoptering into a thread and dressing me down.

So it was that one slow boring morning over at OLO, I decided to have a closer look at this poster’s style and noted similarities with another poster – so I decided to see if my suspicions were correct..

The poster in question initially responded with outrage….but as the morning wore on she admitted that her “sister” had been staying with her and had used her computer, etc etc….

All in all, social media is a strange kind of engagement, one without the usual checks and balances of real life.

I know, for instance, you’d be surprised if you learned that I was not a retired Belgian detective with a mincing gait and magnificent moustaches.

Screenshots of mouse-overs of each of the two userID ‘Macabre’ avatars on ‘Sheep’. Note URL displaying at bottom left of screen is in each case that of a Gravatar image. Screenshots taken at time and date as shown at top right of screen.

Avatar schmavatar.
It;s verrrrrrrrrry s-i-m-p-l-e
DQ is Macabre.Period,whether he logged-on, on different computers or via different tech modes,ISPs etc is irrelevant FG.
He temporarily donned another cap when he got frustrated or lost the upper hand or just felt like insults and ad homs.
That MO goes back since the birth of Macabre.

DQ, talk to your mates, Reader1, Broomhilde, Kendall, Zero, Macabre, SM, Vor, etc, etc, etc, and they’ll tell you there are no sane Finns, nor Dutchman, and of course they are all mad in Norway…
Don’t even mention Denmark!

Leave me out of it Helvi, you made a wrong call associating me with this once before, I realise its extremely difficult for the indignantly self righteous to admit their wrong but I dont know any of those others apart from the occassional reply I make to them here – deal with it, or at least improve your sleuthing skills so you dont make so many mistakes.

“do no harm” Leave that to my elected leader
“karma” I choose who to inflict karma on and when,how where.
“do unto others” before they do it to me
“the greater good” is what I say it is, even if it aint
“innocent until proven guilty” unless they are of coalition political spectrum, or the left
“liberte, egalite, fraternite” are 3 of my other pseudonyms

You had and opening to retain some credibility. You could just have apologised but no, you had to big note yourself.
Unless you ‘miraculously’ produced a medical cert with a ‘Tara’ diagnosis you will 4eva be the troll who got busted big time.
And you STILL continue to readjust your tangled web.
Pathetic, DQ,pathetic.

Only Macabre, at times and when it suits her. As I’ve said before, Daddy is rich and she pleases herself, flying in and flying out whenever she pleases. I doubt there is a mountain range she hasn’t climbed or a blogger she hasn’t insulted.

She is rather pretty in a Goth sort of a way, and very talented in the amorous arts. :)

If anyone is insinuating that she isn’t what I say she is, they can well and truly go and get . . . . .

As far as I know, Reader1 is a psych nurse, aged about 38-42 and fancies herself as a conspiracy theorist and a Nietzsche groupie. We have had some notable jousts and clashes in the past.

Broomhilde – I don’t know if she’s for real or not. The posts seem fairly consistent, and if she is real she is very strange indeed – and even stranger if not real!

when she toes the US and Israeli line, (and abstain on Palestine vote) and when she lacks any moral conviction to do the right thing.(It is obvious Gillard et all knew this settler invasion was imminent) I’m really looking forward to US bases across the country Julia.Imagine how safe we will all be.Yippee!

Since signing on to enact the power plays of the NSW right, she is either incapable of, or constrained into not doing the right thing. She obviously has no loyalty to the voters, and is a repeat offender when it comes to massive misjudgements.Totally poll driven and desperate.
She is out of her depth and dragging us down with her. If she were any more like Abbott she would be him.It seems in Gillards world Israel can invade at will,but a few desperate refugees on leaky boats can f*ck off and die elsewhere.
Marilyn,you maybe too kind to Gillard.

Can you not see that it honestly doesn’t make any sense to me that she should really want such a thing as opposed to simply finding it politically expedient. The latter requires serious condemnation without doubt, but to be able to say that she is so racist as to desire brutality makes the sort of allegation that needs somehow to be evidenced.

So if you want to have the sort of conversation about how bad you think she is then I for one think it ought to be limited to allegations we’ve evidence of in the same way that I think Tony Abbott and Julie Bishop are in trouble if they can’t back their claims of criminality against her.

And I can’t bear leaving your contentions unchallenged to the extent that I think Abbott would be much worse. In which case I don’t think abandoning Labor gives us much to look forwards to. So what is it to be then? Because the cold comfort of being able to viscously attack the party we’ve come to know how to hate when they do the wrong thing doesn’t actually justify the fact that if Abbott goes further than Gillard has then real actual refugees are really and actually going to suffer more.

I think I would somehow prefer to keep trying to convince Gillard to act more morally. Wouldn’t you?

Seriously I’m glad you agree with the point I’ve made and I’ll live with it if Hypo disagrees. But they were questions I posed specifically to Marilyn because she’s the one calling Gillard racist. The only point that I want to make being that willingness to condemn somebody for what they have done and willingness to label condemn them based solely upon your suspicions about their motives are still two different things separated by lack of evidence for the latter.

And how exactly could Abbott be worse on refugee policy, HG?
I mean, other than his reduction of the intake number.
And we all that turning around is a limited option.And even Howard did not excise the continent.

All I can tell you Hypo, is that every time Gillard shuffles to the right Abbott leaps a bit further then complains she still hasn’t done enough.

When she reopened Nauru and Manus Is he still wanted TPVs. If he could he’d tow the boats back to Indonesia, but he and Morrison lacked the gall to front the Indonesians with that policy idea when he had the chance so….

If anything all this proves is that pretty much the whole of asylum seeker policy is a Punch and Judy show pandering to some of the very worst elements in out midst.

It’s always interesting to ask at the point when the conversation goes to writing off leaders whether we’re voting on policy, personality or maybe a bit of both?

As I’ve said Gillard seems capable when inspired by personal attacks on her. And there’s almost a year to go, so those performances beg the question as to whether there are others who could actually do better, if so who and under what circumstances. And by circumstances I mean the promotion or defence of policy settings that either the character of the leader or the consensus of the party get behind. It becomes a kind of question in two halves as to who’s the right leader and what are the right policies.

Do we see Julia as the right leader given better policies, or do we see Rudd or Carr as capable of changing the government’s policy direction and making it stick.

Or if they’re going to change the leader at all then will they do the politically savvy thing and wait until the next election campaign starts so that whoever takes over does so with the benefit of the honeymoon period new leaders normally enjoy if they smile a lot and make a few of the right conciliatory noises and propitiations.

We know your opinion, but critical analysis of policies was what was really called for.

In my view if Gillard changes little she merely relies on dissatisfaction with her performance tending to send more disgruntled Labor supporters into the arms of the Greens than Abbott. And I think that’s a pity because our policies on asylum seekers are so thoroughly despicable that I wouldn’t be surprised if a few people even vote coalition out of spite.

I think another leader could however change tack on the issue of Assange, or on Gay Marriage.

I think any Labor leader should in the run up to the next election be talking positively about the action we’ve taken on climate change because Abbott’s fear campaign has predictably folded like the house of cards that it always was. Perhaps the mooted move to an ETS is an initiative we want to be looking at in the run up to the election.

But whether ANY prospective Labor leader could or should do anything other than slavishly follow the Houston report on asylum seekers is sadly rather difficult to imagine. What I think that they should do is to use the fact that the current situation with the hunger strikers on Nauru may provide an opportunity to go either re-open the conversation, or indeed go back to the Houston panel for another look at what ought to be done. And whoever succeeds in doing that would probably make the better leader.

It’s way simpler than that, HG.
It’s about how she got the job(loyalty), who arranged it, what she has done for the country since getting the job,how that relates to the core values of the voters who voted for the party she leads.
Fail,fail and further fail.
I’m prepared to hear how voters who traditional over ‘leaders’ out will find it within themselves to miraculously install her.The best I have heard is speeches from her mignions telling mr what a stellar job she is doing, and her fluffers telling me she is better than Abbott.
Whilst knowing how shallow and apathetic the electorate is (can be) the most tolerant of Labor supporters are poised to revolt.
And keep in mind also that despite months of verbal diarrhoea about how bad Rudd was, not one of Gillards mouth pieces could/can compile a list of mistakes/betrayals and misdemeanour’s which rival hers, when it comes to policy,especially the traditional Labor policy platform.
Only the spin doctors have a list.And it is coated in crap.
Rudd wanted to set up a faction free government, and that was his downfall.
If Gillard had honestly earned the mantle of PM,she would have and should have received it from a fair process,not from a factional demand.
Another fail.

(And because a recent precedent has been set whereby it seems to be OK to pick and choose your dialogue partners, I am not in any way interested in any of the balck and gold rhetoric from DQ,Cheers)

Sure Hypo, I get all that but just as I also said to Doug the question I posed requires some vision about policy not just a sense of malaise or delusion with respect to the leader’s personal virtues. If you see the response I’ve posted to him then you’ll know what I’m on about.

As I have posted previously, neither Labor or Liberal in its current form has much to offer, it seems we are instead offered a whole plateload of policy red herrings most of which the Government has much power to make a difference too regardless of what decision is made. (Refugees will still choose to flee from persecution regardless if we house them in Nauru or the Hilton for instance – nothing will change in that regard!). Similarly climate change will blithely travel down natures way regardless of what policy paper our neck of the woods agrees on. (Im reminded of the last episodes of Hitchikers Guide to the galaxy where the middle ship gets bogged down on inventing the wheel and progressing their existance because the marketing consultants cant decide what colour it should be! FFS – says it all)
I agree the electorate badly needs fresh poicy initiatives designed to get a healthy economy, full employment well serviced government departments, future vision including population, infrastructure, housing and environmental planning (among others). The sad reality is that in place of the above we are offered a number of rather meaningless debating points that invite who’s right/who’s wrong positions to be taken and nothing other than endless recycled arguments occurs. I cant vote for any ot the major parties (blue, red, green or brindle) and wont as they stand. I dont care who leads, I do care that inertia rules at present.

I had the conversations with her face to face on a number of occassions, she hates refugees.

Who else could possible claim in her Lowy speech that she is aware that refugees are escaping genocide, torture, imprisonment without trial and other human rights violations and then state how she is going to stop them from doing so.

I suggest you read the Nauru refugees web page.

She is a cold, calculating coward, as none of you have ever met and spoken with her and I have who the fuck are you to claim I am lying.

And people in the ALP have been trying to convince Gillard to act more morally since 2002 and have not succeeded one jot.

I am not in any way claiming that you are lying. But nor are you telling the kind of truth that includes evidence of racist statements of any kind on her part.

So while the public record does reflect very poorly upon her dealings with asylum seekers and refugees, the broader accusation of racism that you’re making just isn’t substantiated well enough to support your continual labelling of her as a racist!

You may otherwise be reflecting quite accurately on her overall character. You may even be trying to redefine the term racist to have the kind of broader meaning that we recently found misogynist has. But what you can’t discount is just that she is just a political creature given to the usual vagaries of that profession and lacking the moral courage of convictions you hold when it comes to any discussion of refugees.

You’re making is a serious allegation in terms of way the label racist impugns a person’s character, but I don’t think you can make it stick! And if we don’t point these things out to one another then what winds up happening is that allegations no better founded than the ones Liberal members have recently confabulated from their dirt files are also going to be afforded credence.

And as for who the fuck I think that I am, I’m sure it matters less than it would if Gillard were to pose the same question to you? And I’m far from convinced she would not!

The link, which is live in the tweet-box, is to an article titled ‘A ‘revolt of the engaged’ just might save our politics’, published on 1 December 2012 as an Age opinion piece.

Tanner’s article is an edited extract of his lecture at the Melbourne Law School, ”Integrity in Politics: The Power of Ideas”, presented by the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies in association with the Accountability Roundtable. I do not know whether it was Tanner or an Age editor who gave the title to the extract. I am uneasy with it.

I feel a perhaps more appropriate title would have been along the lines of ‘Integrity in Politics: The Power of the Manipulation of Megadata’, but to be fair, although I believe Tanner to have been sincerely looking for explanation for the state of public debate in Australia, I think he needed to be looking more frequently in a different, more ‘mechanical’ direction, and over a longer time-frame. Yet there was some encouragement that Tanner is prepared to look in that direction, for he said:

“Consumer behaviour governs the fortunes
of businesses, and voter behaviour ultimately
shapes our politics. And voter behaviour
consists of a great deal more than merely voting.”

Taker:
The NDIS scheme and how it might work;
It can only work with enough money and a Labor government.Both are in short supply and getting shorter

The Royal Commission into the RC Church and others on paedophilia;
If and when it actually gets going it will be judged on many levels.Given there are no terms of reference at this stage it is purely a political decision based on you guessed it opinion polls.Labor did not jump because of humanity.They have none left.

The state of the economy;
We are accidentally in reasonable fiscal shape.All down to selling finite resources as quick as we can, instead of being normal(Labor would call it visionary) and value adding by manufacturing it beyond red dust.We have the gas and human resources but we give it to foreigners for squat,while we run our country on greenhouse gas.If we value added we would have a AAAA credit rating.
If,if, if…
On resource plundering, I hope Twiggy Forrest gets his arse severly burnt if the allegations about FMG are true,and I have no reason to think they are not.Another can=o=worms,where other examples will likely soon pop up.

The Murray Darling Scheme(scam) ;
A good start for everything ‘but’ a true sustainable ecological system.As usual a minority have won the day.Even though the bulk of irrigated water is used for non-nutritional food activities and the users (water wasters)don’t vote Labor.
The new (foreign) owners of Cubby will squeeze every last drop out of their wetland contraband and even less will head south.We have lost the ability to feed ourselves(sustainably) first.

Asylum seeker policies;
A disgrace.Every death in a foreign detention centre is now is inextricably connected to Gillard,Bowen and faux Labor, and anyone who supports them and this policy.This paves the way to Gillard out Pariah-ing Howard.

The Palestinian Question;
A disgrace.We should have voted yes.Such decisions add to the hate of America,Israel and their allies and increase the risk of terrorism to our citizens.
We should be expelled from the UN security council immediately, for wasting 100% of the votes we have cast, which our representatives politically fellated the right to use wisely. This decision confirms that Gillard is more Howard than Howard.The Pariah status is almost complete.

The continuing mess in Syria;
See above.No doubt America is now done with Assad and wants him out too.It’s how they run.Look at the mess Egypt is becoming as their man turns into a despot.

The perverse behaviour of the Egyptian president, and its likely destabilising effects on the Palestinian/Israel situation.
See above.

As regards the Palestine issue, we (Australia) do not actually take up our seat on the Security Council until next year. It is a little tough to have us expelled before we even get there!

Our new policy is sensibly to be even-handed, and to back away from the position of the last 65 years (at least) which was to back the USA’s take on Israel all the way. We can thank Bob Carr for that, I think.

Syria is a touchy subject. The neighbours are getting restless; Turkey is still the major local power, well armed and a NATO member. As a reminder, the NATO pact says that an attack on one member is deemed to be an attack on them all. Assad will face an overwhelming response if he is not careful near that border.

Of course, Russia and China will continue to veto any UN Security Council resolutions which might see a Libya-style intervention.

The other problem is do we really want another Islamist authoritarian regime to take power in the middle east? For all Assad’s numerous faults, his is a secular authoritarian regime.

“As regards the Palestine issue, we (Australia) do not actually take up our seat on the Security Council until next year. It is a little tough to have us expelled before we even get there!”
We never needed to,and we now don’t deserve to.

Meanwhile,
We are upping the ante of being the USA’s SE Asian deputy.
This will bite our arse.

Take a look at that vote count which we abstained from and those who said no.
Pariah City, here we come.
I don’t think Australians want a future where we are dependent on the Yanks ‘nuking’ anyone who upsets their interests, and I think when push comes to shove they would actually leave us dry if the result benefited them over us.
The form is there.
I think there should be a referendum of whether we want bases from AH to breakfast time, and what level of risk we want our government to place us in, should be a discussion had, not a fait accompli directed by red headed ball lickers, and star struck bureaucrats auditioning for a Whitehouse stubby holder.
I predict a serious stoush between Carr and Gillard and it won’t be pretty.

I tell you what, anyone who thinks I am too harsh on Gillard should find me even one speech or word or action of decency on her behalf regarding asylum seekers.

Just one, I challenge you all.

Dear Mr Bowen,

I am writing as an 18 year old. I have been on Christmas Island for 41 days then they transferred me to Manus Island. Before I came to Australia I had a different view about the Australian government. I was under the impre
ssion that Australia is a developed country and observed human rights. Unfortunately they don’t seem to care about us and it seems like they are just pretending. The Australian government would like to appear to the world that they observe h
uman rights but they don’t. As a human being I have the right to know about my future and make decisions about it. I have the right to not let people treat me in a bad way. I have the right to have the same life as other 18 year old girls. I have the right to choose. I have the right to not let people put videos of me on the Internet or on tv. I just turned 18. I have lots of hopes and visions but now they are all ruined by you. People like you destroyed my future because of your political position. You sacrificed me just to show the whole world that you observe the human rights. If you don’t want people to come by boat, why would you sacrifice me? You can close the sea boarder, but you don’t care about me. It’s about 3 days that I haven’t eaten anything. I am doing this because maybe you care. I want a clear future. I didnt find any justice in your country. Everything is fake.

Yes you are too harsh. To justify your previous comments would take more than to say Gillard hasn’t said one word, or done an act of “decency” as regards the issue. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I would have thought a charge of racism would require speech and acts, not an absence of them.

“I do hope they all lift their game
next year, because the political
discourse has gone to the feckin dogs.”

Given that this is a discussion thread related to a JW blog post dealing with the quality of political discourse, this seems a very good place to seek some real engagement with respect to a series of seven sequential posts commencing with this post: http://noplaceforsheep.com/2012/10/15/flexing-my-mussel/#comment-50942 . It was a little off-topic on that thread, having arisen there by way of a surprise encounter with a WordPress/Twitter interaction feature which I was moved to explore, which is why I didn’t pursue the subject of it further there.

I am indebted to Doug Quixote for providing the opening for its re-introduction here, which he did with this statement in his post of December 2, 2012 at 12:35 pm, one that followed upon certain macabre revelations as to resort being had to the use of sockpuppetry, perhaps in an attempt to channel discussion in line with a particular definition as to what constitutes the ‘real issues’, to wit:

“… Can we get back to discussing the
issues, please? There are serious matters
to be discussed.

Everyone complains about the level
of political discourse, and then spend
days discussing irrelevancies.”

I don’t accept Doug Quixote’s list of issues as being relevant to this particular discussion. This discussion is about the quality of political discourse, which is one of the reasons I posted the link to Lindsay Tanner’s piece, he being quite well known for his interest in the quality of such discourse and all. Clarifying matters with respect to possible resort being taken to sockpuppetry to influence the direction of debate is not, in such context, an ‘irrelevancy’, IMO. Making it all that more satisfying to explore the prospects of real engagement with respect to that series of seven posts, given that Doug Quixote was the one that had brought that to a halt there by mis-identifying clear assertions as requiring associated allegations. What those assertions require is thought as to what the necessary implications are of any explanations advanced to explain the anomalies those assertions reveal.

People, if they wish to be considered ‘engaged’, need to ask questions.

As Lindsay Tanner says, “voter behaviour consists of a great deal more than merely voting”. Could it be time that we re-assess our assumptions as to how, or even whether, the quality of political debate drives what is eventually officially recorded as aggregate voter behaviour?

FG,
at the moment we are not only being bullied to accept a political dichotomy as the only choice, but in its daily machinations ,we are being bullied by policies themselves.
If we are foisted with a policy such as the current refugee laws, which clearly is further to the right of Howard, and to the right of what the broader community had accepted as a fair policy, prior to Bowen/Gillard cut us out, I’d say that now the issue is being used as wedge politics,post the implementation.
In other words, they made the decision knowing full well the red-neck voices of approval would drown out the the moderate tones of compassion.
Wedge politics Howard Style,101.
And when you see just how cherry picked the elements of the ‘expert panels’ recommendations, have been, you can only come to the realisation that this is ONLY about appeasing the less humane,among us.
It will take a long time (if ever) to have a fairer balanced parliament with an element of mutual respect for the occupants of it,the people it represents, and the people whom its decisions impact on.
It is a convenient smokescreen that the Labor party and its apologists, blame this all on Abbott.
Abbott does NOT run the country,nor does the MSM.Though they certainly impact noticeably, in the current environment.
Just on this one issue,without analysing the many other failures,the cowardice of blaming the refugees themselves,then the opposition and now the expert panel (as though the panel reflected community aspirations) is quite possibly the most gutless trifecta in Australia’s political history.
Gillard and Labor have made enemies of the true believers,the greens,miners,the independents, Rudds support base,QLD and WA voters, the haters on the right,etc etc.
Unless the die hards get a ten to one vote ratio, there is no way that Gillard and Labor can get elected.And as for all the flaccid fizzng about it,the back of Gillard is something I and many others can certainly live with.
I and many others gave Gillard the benefit of the doubt and she failed on so many fronts of(they) have lost count.
What Abbott has done to civility,Gillard has done to trust.

“Unless the die hards get a ten to one vote ratio,
there is no way that Gillard and Labor can get elected.”

What if the proportion of all Australians qualified by age and citizenship to vote that in truth do so in completely lawful fashion is around the same today as it was in 1922, to wit, around 58%?

Allowing for your possible hyperbole in relation to the die-hards, let us allow that Gillard and Labor were to get 20% of that 58% genuine turnout’s votes at the upcoming elections. On its own, that would see Labor consigned to the political wilderness.

What if also some mechanism existed whereby votes purported to be cast in the names of the 42% of persons qualified by age and citizenship to vote, but for purposes of argument accepted as not in truth turning out to vote lawfully, were all cast for Labor candidates? Would it not be that, in pure theory, Labor in such circumstances would win quite handsomely with, on average, around 57% (after allowing for the around 5% of recorded enrollments against which no claim to vote is routinely made) of the total vote eventually officially recorded being recorded for Labor candidates? That wouldn’t be just a win, that would be a landslide!

I wonder whether anything like that might have been going on, back and forth, over the decades to varying extents since 1925, such as to force upon us a political dichotomy as our only choice?

I guess what I am saying is that the way that we vote may as well be done with a coin toss to save money.Which is reflected in your observation.
The difference for this election, if Average Joe has any say, is it’s a two headed coin,and neither head is red.
We certainly need electoral reform, but first we need some real politicians with the guts to make changes which will dilute the power of the big two.

Not holding my breath.
And the dichotomy we have now is not really a traditional one,in that we have two Howard like parties in power.

Tanner’s views deserve consideration. It has always been my view that once Abbott unexpectedly acquired the leadership of the opposition, in late 2009, the big guns swung around in a determined push to destabilise what was then the Rudd government. I doubt that Rudd knew what hit him over the following six months; he was dead in the water as the Abbott torpedo zeroed in on its mark.

The Gillard coup in June of 2010 temporarily destroyed Abbott’s guidance systems, to continue the analogy, and Labor survived the 2010 election, though it was stuck in a minority government.

The 24 hour news-cycle has been a disaster for serious political discussion; just how anyone can examine important issues in depth with a three ring circus going on in the foreground is beyond me.

The real tragedy is that no-one can see any real solution; if anything it may have gotten worse.

The new diversity of the media may eventually succeed in diluting the opinionated shock-jock types and fragmenting their audiences; especially as the older fogies die out (!).

Whoops, I mean, fascinating bunch of observations above, but I still haven’t read anything that goes beyond the assertion that pragmatism is all that’s required to rule this country… and if you’re prepared to accept the lesser of two weevils, then please think about the good work she has done, and about how conflicted she must feel about all the other stuff.

On reflection, JG probably has quite enough strength of character to resist the temptations offerred by razor blades, dettol and elastoplast, but I’d just like to ask that before anyone gets (er) up in arms, that they consider what possible alternatives might exist… apart from political oblivion.

If you’re implying Gillard et al lose sleep over suicidal refugees,you’ll need to convince an army of cynics.There seem to be topics we have not even touched on this site.She scratched us off the map to out Howard Abbott for fucks sake.It’s like that topic is taboo.
I agree there are alternatives to the end of the world,politically and Labor better get one quick.Given that the polls confirm the punters don’t want either Gillard or Abbott the next election looks interesting.
Whatever happens I hope the polls are right and neither gets the job.I can live with that easily.
Sorry Sam,the consequences of her good, are outweighed by the bad if you put human suffering at the top a list where it belongs.(And I am comparing that to all leaders who went before her in the last two decades,or so)
Much of the ‘good’ as you call it is yet to show the forecast impact.
Much is concept and not a work in progress yet.
I apologise for not believing she is a big hearted softy.The way she kicked off her PM’ship indicates she aint.The period since proves she aint.
I think you’re confusing conflicted with contradiction,because at her very best,that is all she ever has been.

What a load of bunnies we are. All sitting here munching the grass, mildly to majorly disaffected by political machinations – by the talent on offer from a 22 million strong population. It all comes down to the limits of democracy, and I do think we get the pollies we deserve.

Look at Julia selling out on a major plank of the then Labor opposition’s policy direction. i wonder how we’d have felt if, way back then when we heard Labor’s gnashing of teeth at Howard’s refugee program, we’d have dreamed that Labor-in-government’s initiatives would have been worse?

And what of the opposition? Abbott, Pyne and Bishop…I mean ABBOTT, PYNE and BISHOP.!!

‘This it is, that for ever keeps God’s true princes of the Empire from the world’s hustings; and leaves the highest honors that this air can give, to those men who become famous more through their infinite inferiority to the choice hidden handful of the Divine Inert, than through their undoubted superiority over the dead level of the mass. Such large virtue lurks in these small things when extreme political superstitions invest them, that in some royal instances even to idiot imbecility they have imparted potency.’

I tend to regard what you refer to as the ‘talent on offer’ as rather being, largely, a very carefully and discretely cultivated ‘crop’. Granted a crop grown in different partisan paddocks, but the one crop nevertheless. The function of this ‘crop’ I see as being to give voice in the Parliament to the desires of those who select and cultivate it, in all of its varieties, rather than to primarily represent the interests of constituents.

Occasionally some real talent comes along, that by a freak of circumstance also evades the selection-out process that I believe to be part of the overall ‘discrete cultivation’ process, talent that also becomes subsequently electorally endorsed and actually gets to grow in one or another of those partisan Parliamentary paddocks. An example that comes to mind is that of the youngest member of the present Parliament.

For all of the apparent real talent represented, the freak of circumstance that saw Wyatt Roy obtain LNP endorsement as its candidate for the Division of Longman at the 2010 Federal elections was that the erstwhile ‘heir presumptive’ to that endorsement (prior to 2007 having been the Member for that Division), Mal Brough, happened at around just that time to have resigned from the LNP over an organisational dispute. Pre-selections were called during the period in which Brough was not a member of the LNP.

The Longman LNP selectors, unexpectedly freed by this circumstance from the probably quite intense pressures they would otherwise have been subjected to, or considered themselves under, to endorse an erstwhile anointeee-of-the-system ‘heir apparent’, were perhaps able to express THEIR mild to major disaffection with political machinations as THEY had come to experience them by taking an opportunity to in good conscience endorse someone THEY THEMSELVES thought would be up to the job of best representing the electors of Longman. As indication of what those pressures may have been like is intimated by reports that Brough, after rejoining the LNP, suggested that Roy’s pre-selection in Longman be set aside, presumably so that the selectors could get to choose again from a wider field of ability. See: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/queensland-lnp-battle-over-preselection-of-teenage-candidate/story-e6frgczx-1225846177664

Contrast the 2010 Longman electoral outcome with the knock-on effect of that same system-anointee’s ongoing pursuit of an endorsement in the adjoining Division of Fisher, precipitative as it can now be seen to have been of the whole Slipper/Ashby debacle of recent months. Perhaps it was karma to which there had come to be entitlements all around, as I understand Slipper earlier in his parliamentary career had had an opportunity to help ventilate matters involving suspected improprieties in the handling of electoral administration ‘megadata’, instead succumbing to the seductions of a ‘high maintenance parliamentary sacerdotalist’ lifestyle.

I suppose it would be just too good if Wyatt Roy’s recent visit to Bribie Island High School’s Year 12 had inspired some student of ability, one old enough to be an elector by the time ALP pre-selection in the Division of Fisher occurs, to put their hand up for endorsement. Said student-cum-candidate might actually secure a counter-to-expected-flow electoral result in that Division at the next Federal elections, delivered as a salute all around to ‘the system’ by the electors of Fisher. Said candidate-cum-Member would enter the Parliament owing no political debts to anyone in ‘the system’, only to the electors. Such could only be an improvement over most of ‘the crop’, especially if such young members were to apply their minds to oversight of the integrity of electoral administration and its management of megadata. That would really help complete the karma cycle!

Can’t say I haven’t tried, or that I haven’t been even-handed, tribo-politically speaking, in suggesting this course. Look:

`

@Wyatt_Roy_MP Why not encourage 1 to seek ALP endorsement for Fisher while ur @ it? That would be fair & even handed, yet not disloyal 2 LNP

Mischievous, ain’t I!? I must add that I have no idea as to what, if anything, along those lines Wyatt Roy may have said on that occasion. I guess he would have been circumspect. Ironic, too, that Bribie Island was one of the loci of suspect electoral enrollments in the earlier years of Slipper’s parliamentary career, a subject upon which he, once reputedly aware, seemed, as time went by, to lose focus.

Our politicians are human beings. That may sound rather trite, but it is a fact which we need to take into account. They get sick, they misspeak, they get tired, they make mistakes. Perhaps we should all cut them a little slack.

Except that in their chosen sworn in role there are bib bikkies and destinies up for grabs.Not only SHOULD we expect accountability and humanity,they are contracted to deliver it.
They like me get compensated for their sacrifices and illnesses etc.
And we all know they are human.

“Bikies with big destinies” helps?
Lots of choppers have big destinies, that’s why bikie molls go for rides with them, on the back.
Or do you mean politicians, lots of people reckon they have the mores of bikies (vice-versa?).
I agree they are duty bound to do their best, but they are no more to be expected to move mountains than you or I, Hypo. Surely?

PW,
I think you are over-pettyfying the whole issue.Local member maybe. But, by the time a politician is in the big house on the front bench I expect them to have the big picture firmly in mind ,24/7.They have the full tool kit to do so.I am not interested in the claimed human frailty of someone who has sacrificed theirs in the full knowledge they have done just that.They have a job to do like everyone else and they should do it properly.
At the moment that means to me (and many others )those who aren’t honouring their mission can f*ck off or we will f*ck them off (or try to) come the election.
I’m just not buying they are the same as me and you crap at the senior level.
By that time if the narcissism has not kicked in,they usually crumble and fall.
It’s their choice.
They are gladiators with a wish list.Our wish list.Gillard shredded the average Aussies wish list long ago.I doubt that Abbott even accepted one.

Because of our ‘bipolar’ political setup,both major parties toe the party line before they even look for they wish list.

I think it is becoming obvious that many comments here indicate that Gillard labor would need to start mincing children in the street before she/they should be held accountable.
I’m bored with the whole political excuses bullshit and the we need to accommodate a hung parliament etc.They have gone against the wishes of their minority partners many times now to back-flip, so there is zero excuse left.
Now it seems the next cab off the rank is ‘they’re only human’.
Unbelievable.
Human yes.Humane,no.
Besides as long as they want to continually abuse the term “I got in it to make a difference for the better” they get what they deserve, one way or the other.
Toxic politicians are not new,it’s just that these days there are more of them.

After a decade of Australians debating this we have got no further than a state of play from Marilyn and DQ, the two comments coming about 4pm 2/12.
Marilyn is again saying we should accept more responsibility, DQ denies we are morally obligated let alone legally.
Unfortunately for Doug, Marilyn’s point that there is an awesome humanitarian issue is true.
However, I still don’t think she has succeeded in making a case that refugees coming from war zones created by the likes of Israel and the USA- entities that DO have REAL power are the sole responsibility of Australia and Australians, outsiders.
I still need to see that the global powers are restraining themselves, or being restrained from, from creating millions of new refugees, before it becomes an open ended movement of people, however unfortunate these, a tap of population movement that can’t be shut off , even for ecological or economic reasons. We are told its just an emergency, an emergency which we are told we need to respond to, short term, as we Australians did concerning Aceh. But I don’t think some folk are being honest about its extent or what they expect of Australians,or what happens if things don’t work out.
No, Hypo, Marilyn, Jennifer etc.
It is NOT our sole responsibility.
There are others far more responsible who have not changed their ways a bit. If it IS a moral responsibility, how about JUST ONCE, some of you indicating why it doesn’t apply to Howard and Abbott, the US, Israel, Europe and the Oil states and the rich in general the way it does to Gillard, a small fish in a big sea and blue collar Australians in general?

Well you asked.
Because when Gillard stole the job.
She took up the mantle to represent US!You,me all of us and all the innocents who stumble upon our humanity.
The rest of the usual suspects you named are responsible too, only we did not vote them in(Even Gillard is a surrogate) Howard has gone,Abbott is not in power, and the USA is not us.(Even if we are their errand boy)
For fucks sake it’s her job to do the right thing.She chooses not to.And you continue this mindless barracking and apologising for her.Are you just a victim of hypnosis or incapable of recognising an inferior PM?
It’s like there’s an epidemic of people who believe they are party apologists above all else.If she stood up and condemned the US war machine and immediately withdrew our troops from Afghanistan and banned all USA bases you’d have a leg to stand on.Talk about nauseating.

Perhaps we’re just bored shitless with the same old same old.Try something other than ‘at least she’s not Abbott.’
How about starting with a list of all the factors (not personality issues) which caused the NSW right to sack a PM.
You know a comprehensive non spin list of the things Rudd did which were worse than the things Gillard has one.
And then you can continue your homework by providing a real reason as to why Gillard should remain PM, and why (how) Labor will win the next election.(Other than pork barrelling as per the Nationals) The power price bribe has fallen flat on it’s face.Looks like the handouts are running out.

And you haven’t even started this homework yet>
December 4, 2012 at 1:11 am #

As I thought.
You have nothing.
Save a back up nasty persona.
You are so thick with double standards.You plead for engagement ant then act like a total pencil dick.
You need to ditch the trolling before people write you off as a waste of space,or a one trick pony.I know HG has you pegged as a nice guy but that obviously changes when you don’t get your own way. Ergo,grow up.

BTW @ JW,
(if you’re out there), what’s happening with the std issue avatar?
It’s had a makeover in the last post for some reason..

So far as I can see from the timestamps, your posts as they appear in the ‘Recent comments’ list are in a consistent order, from the last one showing beside the old avatar, and onward under the new blue one.

Could you be more specific as to where you see posts as being out of sequence?

I never believed that silly old adage about blue and green clashing with each other; they look good together…
I thought that the this place looked better yesterday, like a newly painted room. Hypo looked better too with a bit more weight, sort of roundish, not all spindly and insecty :) (insect like)

I have solved the conundrum.
At some point in the last 24 hours I must have had to fill out a manual email address on a site(for info) and must have MISTYPED my address by one letter.
When I went to post first thing this morning voila!
There were two options pop up when I went to post my first post.I deleted the wrong one and now under the real one all is good.
It must be the email avatar association WordPress default uses.
Good to be back in my original hideous alien format.The other blue clashed with my eyes.
(Some of us are lucky enough to have two when it comes to politics)
Keep up the good work FG.

Those five posts by me plus the two by userID ‘Doug Quixote’ on that ‘Sheep’ thread included references to a Twitter conversation that had involved Senator Ursula Stephens (@ursulastephens), me (@ForrestGumpp), and the Australian Electoral Commission (@AusElectoralCom).

The subject of the Twitter interaction with Senator Stephens was a heads-up to what, if one has any familiarity with the age distribution statistics of the Australian population, seems to be a statistical improbability: 47,579 17-year-olds appearing to turn 18 in the space of just 22 days in July 2010. The 17-year-old cohort of the entire Australian population in 2010 numbered around 220,000 persons. Birthdates are spread relatively uniformly throughout the year, giving rise to the associated expectation that at most around 18,300 could be expected to turn 18 during any given month.

We are confronted in the official enrollment records of the AEC with of the order of three times as many 17-year-olds seemingly disappearing from the record of 17-year-olds provisionally enrolled in a 22-day period than could be expected to have done so was every 17-year-old to be enrolled. This anomaly is intensified with the AEC claim that “enrollment and voting among 19-24-year-olds is traditionally low”.

In 2010, it is my understanding that only around one in four of 17-year-olds was taking advantage of their right to effect provisional enrollment with the AEC before turning 18. If this figure is correct, then not three, but 12 times as many 17-year-olds appeared to turn 18 in that 22-day period in July 2010 than could have been expected to do so. Do you begin to see the problem?

With no explanation of this anomaly having been advanced, indeed with its very existence seemingly having gone un-noticed, the prospect exists that a batch of around 44,000 enrolments may have been effectively held back from emplacement within electoral Divisions’ rolls in 2010 until the very last minute, whereupon those enrollments may have been deployed to facilitate artificial advantage of selected candidates at the then upcoming elections.

My post to this thread of December 2, 2012 at 8:24 am* (one made, as I now note, 40 years to the day from the election of the Whitlam government in 1972) quotes Lindsay Tanner as saying:

“Consumer behaviour governs the fortunes
of businesses, and voter behaviour ultimately
shapes our politics. And voter behaviour
consists of a great deal more than merely voting.”

‘Voter behaviour’ is ultimately recorded in encapsulated form in the officially reported and declared electoral results of elections. Should there come to be reasonably suspected to be any non-statistical influences at work distorting those officially declared results, all efforts to both legitimately influence and/or rationally explain electoral outcomes will be foredoomed to failure. Practice will steadily diverge from theory. Like what we are all seeing?

If you want to improve the political discourse, then first improve your understanding of electoral mechanics. It may answer many of your questions. Otherwise resign yourself to a sideshow over which you will have less and less influence.

Perhaps it is the interest of the AEC to ‘keep delivering’ victory (advantage) to the 2 majors,somehow.(operative word=somehow)
I mean those two parties are the last ones who would actively confront electoral reform,because current systems benefit them,don’t they?

The keeping of a continuous electoral roll requires that the AEC is always updating its records.

The Commonwealth Electoral Act imposes a statutory obligation upon the AEC to not only continuously update enrollment records, but also periodically to publish records of the number of names carried on each Division’s roll. One such reporting is the monthly certificate published in the Commonwealth Government Gazette under the provisions of Section 58 of the Act as to the number of electors enrolled in each Division. The AEC also publishes records of numbers of electors enrolled, whether by statutory requirement or of its own motion, as at other times, such as at the end of each quarter, or, of effective necessity, as at a roll-close prior to elections.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) also maintains and publishes on a regular basis population statistics in quite meticulous detail.

To my knowledge, no statutory obligation has anywhere, or at any time, ever been imposed requiring reconciliation of ABS population statistics with AEC enrollment statistics on an ongoing basis, with regular periodic publication of results of the comparison. That this anomaly has come about is not necessarily reflective of any conspiracy to which the AEC may otherwise be thought to be party, but is simply reflective of a failure to reconcile the two independently kept sets of records.

One of the reasons that there has historically been a closure of the electoral rolls before any election has been in order to prevent the opportunistic emplacement, or transfer, of electoral enrollments arising out of the aggregated actions of numbers of persons, each acting alone, in attempts to increase their individual influence upon outcomes. No conspiracy has to be envisaged.

The point is that this apparent concentration of birthdates in just 22 days in July IS an anomaly, one that requires explanation.

For that to work as an explanation, Helvi, it would have to be ‘conceived in Spring … born in Winter’. Either way, it simply doesn’t happen that there is any significant seasonal concentration of human births in Australia.

Come on Forrest the man has already dropped the hint.You MUST stop digging.There is obviously nothing untoward in this at all.Obviously politics, and their boot shiners, in this country is devoid of conspiracy and the enquiry in NSW is a just a pretend witch hunt,designed to employ poor misunderstood,under appreciated lawyers.
Relax.Let the politicians call the shots.They don’t need us/scrutiny/accountability( on one side at least) What could possibly go wrong?
Your time would be better spent helping to stop those nasty boats.

For those of you not constrained by ego and partisan propaganda,and gifted with two eyes,with full vision, it may be refreshing to know there may be some momentum for Labor to save itself.
If they prefer oblivion,they don’t need to lift a finger.Given how Rudd was treated by his party,(while an elected PM) don’t count any chicken hatchings yet.

What the deniers within refuse to hear.
“SAM DASTYARI: Either we change or we die. ”
“SAM DASTYARI: Frankly, this idea that you’ve got groups of people really within groups of people, where they come to conclusions, come to votes and bind on them I just don’t think is in the principles of the Labor movement.
There should only be one binding group and that group should be the parliamentary caucus. That’s a position I’ve outlined in the past, that’s a position I continue to hold.
I think that you have to actually update your rules and structures so that it can’t happen any longer. ”

“JOHN DELLA BOSCA: Part of the problem we have confronted recently is the selection of the party leader by factional processes, by the party organisation. The solution is to make sure that people like Sam Dastyari and his ilk are responsible to the party membership directly and have to go every year or every two years or every three years, whatever it be, and make their case for re-election.

EDIT
Apologies.
The radio transcript is based on Faulkner’s recommendations,which the faceless brainless,spineless men(and women) will,of course,ignore.The best we will get is pretend discussion to get them through the next election, aka political oblivion.

In the light of your headline “NSW right responsible for installing Abbott government”, would this point in the discussion be a good time to call to mind the reported status of former Senator Arbib revealed in ‘cablegate’? And a good time to remember the report of what seemed like the reporting-back of SA Senator Don Farrell in those same cables?

Could the drawn out events we observe constitute an intended orchestrated ‘baton change’ from one team of ‘tweedledums’ to another of ‘tweedle-even-dumbers’ with the Australian public remaining none the wiser? Could such a baton change be being regulated by the management of megadata such that, if once recognised, that orchestration might eventually come to be described as the work of the Work of God?

WellFG it seems feasible.Everyone knows that there are greater powers than both big parties who advantage by having either in power ,but would advantage more with a certain switch.And we all know by now on a scale of Loyalty, one ten, religion,faction party,certain mates,media,big business all top loyalty to voter and loyalty to country.

But some here will not listen,will not see.Don’t want to.
It’s all about a flag,a barrack, a personality.A galloping steed.A little victory speech.
A pissing competition.One redheads job outweighs the life and security of thousands of desperate people apparently.

BTW FG,
the upcoming RCom will really test once and for just how separate church and state are.That is of course if Tweedle Dumbests string pullers allow her to write Terms of reference which actually deliver on the obvious requirements of said RCom.But don’t hold your breath.Look at what she and Bowen did to refugees.

Some just do not listen. They have that in common with Hanson-Young, Rhiannon and Milne ( is one of them a regular here, by any chance?) No explanation will satisfy someone who will not listen.

My posts are for other readers who may actually take the information on board. Look back over the archives dear reader and you will find enough words written over the Rudd issue to sink a battleship. But Rudd is past history, thankfully.

As for Gillard’s merits, they are manifold, and set out at length, but also every word written has been turned on its head by those who will not listen, to forward their own agenda.

After several attempts to glean some facts, and turning out none, a fellow poster said;
“Look back over the archives dear reader and you will find enough words written over the Rudd issue to sink a battleship.”

But,in an effort to find a single credible shred of evidence from his greatest detractor here, to support the premise that Rudd has done ‘evils’ worse than Gillard, to justify his removal etc, or damaged Labor etc, I searched the comments.
Not one single comment from DQ.Not one.Zero,nada,zilch.

Not even after the juicy paragraph stating;
“Today’s Neilsen poll in the Sydney Morning Herald shows that Labor would win an election now if they sacked Julia Gillard as their leader and brought back Kevin Rudd. 44 percent of those polled prefer Rudd, while only 19 per cent support Gillard.”

It is a fact that the more you read JWs articles about Rudd,the more toxic Gillard appears.It is a nice documentation of her devolution to the rapid descent to the barrels bottom and beyond.
Far from sinking a battleship,the evidence actually looks like it could justify raising the Rudd Titanic.

Dear DQ aka Macabre (from now on forever to be referred to as Macabre, aka too weak to take it on the chin.The link above was stellar definitive research which proves once and for all you are a liar and filled with shit.
Of the 3 articles with Rudd in the title not one had a single comment from you.
Not once have you been able to present a valid reason as to how Rudd came close to the vile destruction of Labor’s values as perpetrated daily by Gillard.
Not once have you convinced a single living breathing human that your trolling as Macabre was less than the act of a frustrated partisan mouthpiece.
You had to hide behind another name to attack a few regulars because you don’t practise what you preach.
“Shooting is too good” etc.
Bagged Helvi,bagged Marilyn.But bagged with cowardice.
I have tried endlessly to get you to justify your pathetic positions and you won’t.And you won’t because you can’t.No-one can.
Gillard is worse than Howard ever was, because Howard was an arsehole and wore the badge with an arrogant pride,Gillard is an illegitimate arsehole who has deceived and continues to deceive the voters of this country.She leans on her gender when the going gets tough.She assails the weak from the parapets of the factions.She mouths the words of others.
You are a mindless troll on this topic Macabre(most appropriate moniker by far)
Call yourself by whatever name you wish.
Pretend away that there is a mystery object in London if you wish.
It just makes you look as stupid as you are deluded by the scum of the NSW right who you grovel before.
V

Time to be happy everyone and wallow in your ‘soon to be millions’.
All through the genius of politics.
As of the latest COAG,SOME voters will be gifted $250, (probably the ones with kids.)
At the same time as our power bills have already escalated to a painful threshold, we now have a a carbon tax added to all our hefty bills.
So what could have been small % increase is now a significant impost.The cumulative amount is a challenge to many.
Let’s say you are lucky enough to have a monthly power bill of $250,or less.
What that means is that apart from pensioners (who may get extra compo,who would know) the rest of us pay 11 of the 12 remaining power bills in full.
(That’s iff your power bill is $250, or less.)
Add to this the tax burden cost (to taxpayers) of rolling out smart meters(oxymoron) across the land,even to states where Gillards $250 will have zero impact or jurisdiction.
This is blatant and ineffectual pork barrelling.I hope voters can see through this scam.People would be much better off and so would the atmosphere,( the planet) if the solar panel rebate was extended and the regulatory watchdog kicked the arses of the scammers running our power grids, instead of giving us less than $5 a week which would cover an average hot water heater of 5 hours during peak times.
This is an obscene joke.
When we get to read the small print it may turn out that -yet again-, those without dependants will sponsor the $250 to those who have them.And when the next elected government does a GST back flip and raises the rate, we will hopefully,finally question why we let loyalty to the two majors rule our tiny little brains.We are being robbed blind by the parasites in Canberra.Our finite resources are making everyone but us secure in our own country.And the miners are not slowing down their carbon production OR paying their fair share for it either.
Desperate refugees are the least of our problems.

“JULIA Gillard used her prime ministerial office to run a political “war room” in the lead-up to this year’s leadership spill and had sanctioned the carpet-bombing of rival Kevin Rudd by her senior ministers, according to new claims about the event.

The PM was alleged to have run a daily political campaign-style session for a week before the February challenge, with her staff and deputy Wayne Swan in “full election mode”.

The Monthly claimed that central to the strategy of*** publicly destroying Mr Rudd’s character ***was Ms Gillard’s communications director John McTernan, a former adviser to the Blair government in the UK. It cited a similar strategy that was used in the political battle between Mr Blair and his successor Gordon Brown.

The Daily Telegraph first revealed the “carpet bombing” strategy used by the PM’s office to not only ****ensure Ms Gillard’s win, but damage Mr Rudd*** so badly he would never recover politically.

The Monthly article confirmed reports the character assassination of Mr Rudd was not the work of rogue ministers but a well co-ordinated plan ***sanctioned by the PM***.

“They were definitely given their talking points, they didn’t just go out and do it on their own, it was A well orchestrated political campaign,” a government source said.Mr Rudd would not comment on the article. His office claimed he had not read it.

The PM’s office also would not comment.”

Say what?
But,but..The PM’s office also would not comment.
Surely she…The PM’s office also would not comment.
Perhaps it should read “The PM’s office DARE not comment.”

Mainly because her (our) leaders in the NSW right were not in the mood for writing her a comment to read out.

Move along staying close to the wall
Looking over your shoulder just in time.
Avoid the light, close your eyes
And put your hand in mine.
And put your hand in mine.

Are we in danger, or is it that
You think we might be ?
But I think I’d like to get out of here,
This place it frightens me,
This place it frightens me.

Running for our lives,
At least we’re pretending we are.
Running for our lives,
We never get very far.
We never get very far.
We never get very far.

Stop pretending
This is a child’s adventure,
The only way I can take it
Is playing the game.

Be quiet, there’s a gate ahead.
Do you think we can make it ?
Will it be different, or just the same ?
How long can we keep escaping,
How long can we keep escaping,
How long can we keep escaping
Into another prison ?

Running for our lives,
At least we’re pretending we are.
Running for our lives,
We never get very far.
We never get very far.
We never get very far.

Move along staying close to the wall,
Looking over your shoulder just in time.
Avoid the light, close your eyes
And put your hand in mine
And put your hand in mine.

Running for our lives,
At least we’re pretending we are.
Running for our lives,
We never get very far.
We never get very far.
We never get very far.

We never get very far.
We never get very far.
We never get very far.
We never get …
____________________________
“London Still”
(Lyrics )
The Waifs
Wonder if you can pick up my
Accent on the phone
When I call across the country
When I call across the world
I — see you in my kitchen
I can picture you now
As you toast to your small town
When you drink the happy hour
I’m in London still
I’m in London still
I’m in London still

I took the tube over to Camden
To wander around
I bought some funky records
With that old Motown sound
And I miss you like my left arm
That’s been lost in a war
Today I dream of home and not of London anymore
I’m in London still
I’m in London still
Yeah I’m in London still

You know it’s okay
I’m kinda happy here for now
I think I’ve finally grown up
And got myself a love of now
And if I ever come home
And I, I think I will
I hope you’re gonna wanna hang at my place on Sunday still
Oh yeah I hope you will
Cause I’m in London still

You know we got it sorted, yeah
We really got it down
To a fine art on Sunday
In a sleepy Sunday town
I wonder what I’m missing
I think of songs I’ve never heard
I’m dreaming of your voices
And I’m dreaming of your hurt
I’m in London still
I’m in London still
I’m in London still

Oh I’m in London still
la-la-la-la-la London still
I’m in London
________________________
Pink Floyd
“Is There Anybody Out There”
(Lyrics)
Is there anybody out there?
Is there anybody out there?
Is there anybody out there?
Is there anybody out there?
——————————————–
Men At Work
Lyrics

” Who Can It Be Now? ”

Who can it be knocking at my door?
Go ‘way, don’t come ’round here no more.
Can’t you see that it’s late at night?
I’m very tired, and I’m not feeling right.
All I wish is to be alone;
Stay away, don’t you invade my home.
Best off if you hang outside,
Don’t come in – I’ll only run and hide.

Who can it be now?
Who can it be now?
Who can it be now?
Who can it be now?

Who can it be knocking at my door?
Make no sound, tip-toe across the floor.
If he hears, he’ll knock all day,
I’ll be trapped, and here I’ll have to stay.
I’ve done no harm, I keep to myself;
There’s nothing wrong with my state of mental health.
I like it here with my childhood friend;
Here they come, those feelings again!

Who can it be now?
Who can it be now?
Who can it be now?
Who can it be now?

Is it the man come to take me away?
Why do they follow me?
It’s not the future that I can see,
It’s just my fantasy

Oh…Who can it be now?
Oh…Who can it…Who can it…
Yeah yeah yeah
________________________

The surplus promise is one of the stupidest tactics imaginable.And it further devalues voter confidence in our democracy, as yet another falsehood reigns supreme.
If it does not happen the MSM will fry faux Labor.If it does I will be at the cost of services normally sacrosanct to a real Labor govt.
This is what we (politics Oz Style) have become.When Abbott says jump Gillard has repeatedly leapt out of her socks.Sadly she landed on his side of the fence.
Out Abbotting Abbott is nothing to be proud of, and any electoral loss will see some very good ministers go.I guess the good news it will also afford an opportunity to get rid of Garret,Wong and Ferguson.Three Stooges we need like a hole in the head.Cardboard cut-outs could do better.

And so the shallow end of the pool begins to stir.Too bad if you don’t have school kids.
Did someone mention a deficit?
No money for the desperate,but plenty for the local fence sitting prolific breeders.Post Christmas flat screen buying frenzy,part 2.

The guestroomsAn 1870 flashback abc lavishly decorated
with the finest fabrics and furnishings. Imperial College’s location in South Kensington puts you oon the sidelines.
In some cases iff you want abc to spend is possibly the most indispensable issue to consider.

Before you book your accommodation online through our site,” he said. Becoming more popular with backpackers since opening the first hostel in Hvar Town, Phara is a clean and safe place to visit year-round.